Will the Redundancy tranches be used to fix our manning pyramid?

[Witty_Banter]

What are the bets, ladies and gents? We've got a surplus of SNCOs and above, a few short of JNCOs and a glut of teeny boppers flooding in at the bottom. What are the odds that they'll pick a few of us off to quick-fix the manning issues?

 

[Realist78]

Redundancy is all about money saving, correct manning is another issue IMO.

 

[Witty_Banter]

Quite true, though manning numbers and cash available are intrinsically linked - ie the wages bill every month!

 

[Realist78]

Quite true, though manning numbers and cash available are intrinsically linked - ie the wages bill every month!

I wasn't on about manning numbers but correct rank balance etc.

 

[Witty_Banter]

I wasn't on about manning numbers but correct rank balance etc.

Sorry, I did understand what you meant but failed to engage brain prior to responding. Technically we have too many SNCOs, possibly due to the removal of CT and the trade amalgamation, and they're downgrading quite a few slots to SAC / Cpl which will leave even more of the Middle and Senior management out of position. Hence, excess manning in the middle and a wonky shaped pyramid - a good target for redundancy. The only reason I think this would happen is because I don't think many SNCOs will be short of the 22 year mark and want to lose their hard earned pension. Those who have already reached it? Well your guess is as good as mine. I don't think the trade will be able to 'promote' it's way out of trouble unless it's done over several years, and by then the undermanned JNCOs and SACs may well pushed the big red PVR panic button. Only MHO...

 

[Witty_Banter]

In other words, removing 20 or so Middle management from the trade - and not replacing them - would not only solve the manning problem but also save hundreds of thousands of pounds a year from the wages bill

 

[Soon To Leave]

I'd be surprised if they got it right this time - they haven't before!

 

[muttywhitedog]

But the longer they fail to get it right whilst reducing the manpower, the greater the pain for those remaining who suffer the imbalance.

 

[AlienFB]

Quote for a SDSR briefing I went to: "The manning drawdown is hoped to change the manning pyramid from a chestnut tree to the Eiffel tower"

 

[The Enduring Sarge]

With the manning cuts the pyramid will more than likely resemble the Blackpool Tower!DT_Xtremez_19:

 

[Witty_Banter]

Dunno, I don't think our trade will be hit very hard, if at all. But I would imagine that there are still a few SNCOs out there, who've done their 22, and for some reason still haven't got their crowns. If I were one of them, I'd find the idea of redundancy quite appealing (if all other things are in place - somewhere to live, quals for an alternative career until pension time, etc). Or is that a position where you daren't leave because your wife has become accustomed to the 'rock star wages' and you don't have to worry about repairs to your house?

 

[The Enduring Sarge]

You seem to fixating on the SNCO's who haven't as yet got their crowns. However, what about newly promoted WO's who still have 15-12 years until they reach age 55?
I would hazard a guess that this will produce a bigger bottleneck. Most SNCO's who ahve reached the 22yr point will no doubt be on LOS 30, so is redundancy really that appealing to them?